New NAEP Results Show Need for Library Funds

When California 4th graders placed last in the United States in 1992
in reading, the experts blamed whole-language instruction. Whole
language has been purged and replaced by "systematic, intensive
phonics." Yet California's NAEP reading scores are still in the
basement.

Studies show a clear relationship between access to books and
reading scores (including NAEP). California's school libraries remain
the worst in the country, its public libraries are among the worst. We
need to invest more in libraries, not workbooks.

Stephen KrashenRossier School of Education
University of Southern California
Los Angeles, Calif.

Reports on School Choice Omit 'All-Important Fact'

To the Editor:

Neither Paul T. Hill's Commentary on "Doing Choice Right" (Nov. 19,
2003), nor the report by the National Working Commission on Choice in
K-12 Education, reported on in this same issue of Education
Week, in your article "Panel Says Choice's Benefits Worth
Risks," addresses an all-important fact about school choice plans
that include nonpublic schools: The overwhelming majority of them are
pervasively sectarian institutions that appeal to relatively few
parents or teachers not of the faith that sponsors the schools. Voucher
plans that include private schools would inevitably fragment the
student and teacher populations along sectarian religious and very
likely other lines.

It is too bad that Education Week does not review books. Two
excellent books published this year deal directly with the issues
discussed in Mr. Hill's essay and your news report: Public School
Choice vs. Private School Vouchers, edited by Richard D. Kahlenberg
(Century Foundation Press) and Democracy and Intolerance: Christian
School Curricula, School Choice, and Public Policy, by Frances R.A.
Paterson (Phi Delta Kappa Educational Foundation). These books bear out
the criticisms of voucher plans leveled by the National Education
Association, the American Federation of Teachers, and People for the
American Way.

Edd DoerrPresident
Americans for Religious Liberty
Washington, D.C.

To the Editor:

Paul T. Hill's Commentary "Doing Choice Right" includes a statement
that must be questioned or clarified. He says that "district central
offices now rake off nearly half of all the money that is supposedly
available to educate children." In order to believe this assertion, one
must adopt a very narrow view of classroom expenses, that is, to count
only dollars spent within the four walls of the classroom.

I assume he includes in his "rake off" totals such things as busing
in rural areas, reading assistance for English-learners, special
education services, counselors, food service, cleaning, insurance,
utilities, curriculum development, teacher training, and other
"fat."

In fact, when these costs are deducted, at least in California, the
net cost of the district office is less than 10 percent of total
expenditures. If schools of choice can provide quality education to
children without most or all of these services, or at much lower
prices, then they are really on to something.

The crux of the choice issue is school site flexibility. If
California is any predictor of the future, increasing regulation and
bureaucracy will also be the fate of schools of choice. The same unions
and social forces that have tied up regular schools are now flexing
their influence on charter schools. (See recent press reports on the
court battles and political fighting over making Sacramento High School
into a charter school.)

A lack of focus on citizenship education in the California
History-Social Science Academic Content Standards prompted the
California legislature to authorize funds for the state department of
education to direct the Center for Civic Education to create the newly
published "Education for Democracy: California Civic Education Scope
and Sequence." That document highlights important civic education
learning embedded in the existing history-social science standards and
includes connections to state English language arts and other
standards, service-learning strategies, classroom applications, and
resources.

The First Annual Congressional Conference on Civic Education, held
in Washington this past September, brought together delegations from
all 50 states and the District of Columbia to develop state action
plans dedicated to the premise that every student in every school be
equipped with the knowledge, skills, and dispositions to be highly
effective citizens in a democratic society. "The Civic Mission of
Schools," published by the Carnegie Corporation of New York and the
Center for Information & Research on Civic Learning &
Engagement (CIRCLE) is another national initiative advocating
high-quality citizenship education.

But these civic education initiatives, state standards, standardized
tests, and the extraordinary resources and professional-development
opportunities available to schools nationwide may continue to be
ignored if legislators and educators continue to emphasize reading and
math education at the expense of all other subject areas. The No Child
Left Behind Act centers almost entirely on achievement in literacy and
mathematics.

Devoting up to five hours of instructional time each day in
elementary schools to these areas leaves little room for history,
science, art, music, physical education, civic education, and other
subjects. Allocating professional-development funding to the exclusion
of civic education prevents teachers from accessing important
information and innovative training techniques designed to engage
students in democratic participatory learning.

Reading and math instruction provides students with important
skills, but until we realize (or remember) that the purpose of public
education is to educate the "whole child" to become an informed,
committed, actively engaged citizen, civic education will continue to
be disregarded in many schools. If we don't teach our students how to
participate more fully in democracy, not only will they be "at risk,"
but so will the future of our democracy.

Michelle M. HerczogMember of Executive Committee
California Council for the Social Studies
Palmdale, Calif.

A Teacher's 'Testimony' On Moldy Rooms' Effects

To the Editor:

Your recent article reporting on the dangers of molds in our schools
is an important one because it brings greater public awareness to a
menace affecting so many students and public school teachers ("Mold Fears," On Assignment, Nov.
19, 2003). While the health of many has suffered because of this
problem, teachers who have voiced concerns often have received an
administrative brush- off or have been seen merely as
"troublemakers."

As a former public school teacher who worked in a "sick building"
for more than three years in the late 1990s, I can give firsthand
testimony on the risks of working in a moldy, dangerous environment for
any length of time. About 10 years ago, I transferred to a new school,
in a "newer" building. But on the first day of class, as I entered my
new room, I was shocked to find the walls, desks, counters, and floors
of my classroom covered with a powdery or black spotted mold or mildew.
I had to wash the entire room with bleach.

Within months of my transfer to this building, I developed
increasingly annoying and severe sinus and allergy symptoms that led to
my requiring five weekly shots. Colleagues in my building would suffer
asthma attacks, frequent coughs or severe headaches, and worse.

Within less than two years, I had to have extensive sinus surgery,
followed by another procedure a year later. The constant irritation of
allergy-provoking substances in my classroom had created the problem.
My physician told me that a majority of his patients were teachers and
children from the public schools. In a letter to the school
administration, he indicated that my immune system was compromised.
Yet, the school administration had no plans to make changes to the
building.

At a meeting I requested with the school's building-plant officials,
I learned that the district was receiving complaints about the negative
effects of mold in three schools. The officials said that since
more complaints were coming from one school, an experimental
air-cleaning unit would be tried at that one facility. I was aghast. I
remember asking, "So you know that there are three schools
making children ill, and you only plan to fix one?" The answer was
yes.

Meanwhile, I asked for a medical transfer and was sent to a middle
school across town. My new classroom portable was in a constantly moist
field behind the school. The building's walls were almost black with
moldy spots, and it was cooled with a little portable air- conditioning
unit that had a tray full of dripping water where dangerous growths
were likely to form. Within four months, I contracted an almost fatal
three-month-long case of Legionnaire's Disease, an illness caused by
bacteria instead of mold, but one to which the immune-compromised are
prone.

Sadly, many colleagues from sick buildings also were suffering, but
they said they feared for their jobs if they made too much trouble by
reporting the mold's effects on them. Within a year of my recovery, I
reached the conclusion that if I wanted to stay healthy, I could not
trust my health to the public school system. I took an early
retirement. I now teach, tutor, and work for myself with twice the joy
and half the stress.

I hope that other educators suffering in sick schools will learn
from your story and my experience and will gain the courage to do
whatever it takes to bring about a safer environment for their students
and themselves. It may not make one popular, but it could save a
life.

Judith B. MundayChesapeake, Va.

The School Leader's Job Is an Expansive One

To the Editor:

John Merrow's Commentary "A Modest Proposal for New School
Leadership" (Nov. 12, 2003), in one sense, hits home. Mr. Merrow
has a novel approach to improve the running of schools: hire the Fire
Chief, the Swimming Coach, and the Band Director or Highway Engineer to
run them. His rationale is sound and his analogies are very
creative.

The fire chief manages resources responsibly, carefully apportioning
his limited resources where and when most needed. The swimming coach
shows results for better or for worse, always striving to keep the
swimmers afloat. The band director pays attention to all of the
instruments in the band, encouraging individual talent while
acknowledging everyone. And highway engineers anticipate mistakes by
designing systems to prevent accidents.

Still, we must raise questions. The fire chief can distribute
resources equally, but can he decide the most effective approach to
teaching math to all students? The swimming coach can watch kids whom
she has taught to swim, but can the coach design lesson plans aligned
with state standards? The band director can pay attention to all of the
instruments and encourage individual talent, but can he differentiate
instruction to meet the needs of all players? And the highway engineer
can design roads to prevent accidents, but can he be on the scene, as
teachers are, when the accidents happen?

I think the breadth and depth of school leadership is so expansive
that an effective school leader needs to do all the things that people
in these other professions do. They also need to be as fiscally
knowledgeable as any accountant, as personable as any salesman, as
political as any senator or congressman, and as energetic as an
Olympian athlete.

Phyllis GimbelFormer School Principal
Wellesley Hills, Mass.

Who Dares Question Federal School Policy?

So school administrators think there is some kind of hidden motive
in the No Child Left Behind Act? Do they have any idea how many years
of research went into this plan? Do they know how many hundreds of
administrators, dozens of teachers, scores of parents, and months of
tabulating and scrutinizing various analyses and alternatives went into
it? The administration must get its message out.

This is the same administration that brought about our first
unprovoked invasion of a foreign country, based on a premise that has
yet to be demonstrated as true. This is the same administration that
pulled out of international treaties, based on its own—not the
experts' or the diplomats' or other nations'—interpretations of
those treaties.

How dare school administrators question this administration? No one
else does.

Bob LilienthalWakefield, R.I.

In Favor of Businesses' Subsidizing the Schools

Anyone should be able to subsidize schools. With budget cuts
and more challenging students that require medical services, social
services, one-to-one teacher support, free lunches, and other programs
that schools do not receive enough state or federal funds for, schools'
financial responsibilities have increased dramatically, with no
increase in funding.

Businesses have a stake in student achievement. They want employees
who are prepared for the workplace. Many articles have been written
about what "type" of students businesses expect high school graduates
to be—articles describing, for example, the shift from
assembly-line workers to critical thinkers who can work
collaboratively. If the business world expects graduates to meet
certain criteria, then it should financially support the schools beyond
companies' local tax responsibilities. Businesses should also work hand
in hand with the schools to provide mentors and tutors to support
struggling students, as there is not enough teacher power to do this
without teachers staying at school beyond 5 p.m.

The business community should take part in the education of every
child, as it truly does take a whole village to raise a child.

Pam ZiolkowskiPlano, Texas

To the Editor:

It's time to rethink the way education is being managed, away from a
remotely designed and locally delivered service, to a more intimate
relationship between all stakeholders.

A business that can feel part of a system and find a reason to take
pride in it may be far more willing to pony up more investment in it.
And yes, businesses should do this; raising education quality raises
the performance of future employees, entrepreneurs, and the community's
financial base. We all share in the responsibility to do what we can to
become more like partners in this process.

We can observe, through the success of Chugach school district in
Anchorage, Alaska, that developing a customer-focused strategy that
communicates value can enjoy widespread community support.

I would like to see more schools follow this plan, where families,
businesses, and communities become stakeholders in the education
process, rather than observers or simple recipients of a service.

We should therefore "support policies and programs aimed at
improving family risk factors, rather than trying yet another special
school program," he writes. "[W]e must look hard at programs that aim
to change family behaviors or, at least, to supplement parenting
behaviors for infants."

Compelling logic, but flawed. The compensatory programs/school
characteristics that were the basis of Mr. Armor's comparison were of a
narrow range. They were limited to those in the traditional public
school structure. Such programs and possibilities as, for example, KIPP
schools (the Knowledge Is Power Program), Roman Catholic schools, and
as yet unknown possibilities that expanded school choice would foster,
were not considered in his analysis.

Quoting the veteran Washington Post education reporter and
columnist Jay Mathews, in a July 1, 2003 column: "There is a suggested
treatment for the ills of low-income schools that is approaching that
same point [as medical research so good it is 'called off early so that
everyone can adopt the new method'] ... but I wonder if we will have
the good sense ... to recognize that it is time to apply it to many,
many more schools. I am talking about KIPP, a national network of 15
public schools—mostly independent charters or contract
schools— that have produced achievement gains of a size and
consistency I have never seen before."

While recognizing the vital importance of family characteristics,
let us not succumb to the defeatist belief that schools cannot have a
profound impact. They can—in a supportive regulatory
environment.

Tom ShufordRetired Teacher
Lenoir, N.C.

Departing Official Asks: Do Voters Weigh Issues?

To the Editor:

I wonder if voters really "weigh school taxes"—and other
issues ("There's No
Guarantee When Voters Weigh School Taxes," Nov. 26, 2003). You
report that a successful school levy campaign in Bloomington, Minn.,
included 1,000 yard signs—one for every 10 students. I was just
defeated in my bid for re-election to our school board. My opponent
spent thousands of dollars on yard signs with the words "elect" and his
name. He admits knowing little about education or our 2,250 student
district, which neither he nor his family has attended. He does have
name recognition.

I worry about whether our education system prepares voters to weigh
issues and be well-informed voters. As a school board member since
2000, I also worry about how savvy boards really are in allocating
scarce resources and giving school communities the best value for their
tax dollars. Money-related issues of proportion and public perception
often are ignored by our district policies.

We just asked voters for a 0.75 percent income tax for operating
expenses. A year earlier, we bought a $370,000 state- of-the-art phone
system for every classroom and office. The board—with no previous
notice—approved it in an emergency session while I was away. I
would have argued that such a fancy phone system sends the wrong
message in tight financial times. Students joke about it even as the
software needs upgrading.

Our operating levy failed and our district must begin making budget
cuts, even as it tries to pass the income tax in March. What will
voters think when reconsidering the issue? We have never discussed
possible cuts, lest these appear to be "threats." But surely voters
need information to properly weigh school taxes. Or have previous board
decisions already colored public perception and conveyed a potent
message?

Betty Raskoff Kazmin
Board of Education Member
Willard, Ohio

'Self-Selecting Elite' Seeks Demise of Boards

To the Editor:

The question is, who shall rule? The ability of citizens to govern
themselves is a cornerstone of our democracy, and governing schools
should be a fundamental demonstration of this democratic principle.

A self-selecting elite is advocating the dissolution or
circumvention of school boards ("Essential or Obsolete? Panel
Debates Value, Role of School Boards," Reporter's Notebook, Oct.
29, 2003). At one time, I was close to being convinced that this was
necessary, but now I find that the preponderance of evidence
demonstrates it to be faulty thinking. For example, one might
hypothesize that it is the loss of school boards that has led to "A
Century of Failed School Reforms" as described in Diane Ravitch's book
bearing that subtitle.

One of Ms. Ravitch's fellow members on the Koret Task Force on K-12
Education, the Harvard University economist Caroline Hoxby, points out
that at the turn of the 20th century, "we had about 120,000 school
districts in the United States and now we're down to 15,000, so there's
actually been a lot of consolidation." I would submit that there has
also been a great loss of self-government through the systematic
exclusion of the common sense of our capable citizens.

With only a small amount of scholarly effort, the group advocating
the dissolution of school boards could have found many examples of
boards hard at work to improve the education of their districts'
children. To name but a few for them: Clark County, Nev. (Las Vegas);
Orange County, Fla. (Orlando); Burlington, Kan.; Nashville, Tenn.;
LaCrosse, Wis.; Estes Park, Colo.; Lake Washington, Wash. (Redmond);
Austin, Texas; Habersham County, Ga.; Bloomfield, N.Y.; Beaufort
County, S.C.; and Chetek, Wis.

I don't believe that any of these boards would claim to be "the
Platonic ideal of the elected local school board," but they are
participating in this democratic republic, as flawed as it is.

Reportedly only one-thirty-second of 1 percent (0.0003125) of all
Americans are elected to public office. To me, that is a very small
number (which includes school board members) to be called "rule by the
people." It would seem a grave mistake to further reduce that number
and adopt the rule of the elite, as advocated at this conference.

Mark ShermanChetek, Wis.

Achievement Gaps: The 'Hottest' Topic Is the Hardest to Comprehend

It is likely that no real change in the disparity seen in the school
achievement of poor and minority students will be able to be effected
until pregnant women are better looked after (nutritionally, socially,
economically), and are given access to information about the
differences they can make for their babies—information on child
development, brain research, strategies for developing bright kids, and
so on.

Glynne SutcliffeChandlers Hill Play School
Adelaide, South Australia

To the Editor:

As a former teacher in an underperforming school in Compton, Calif.,
I saw a variety of factors that led to the school's continually low
scores on standardized tests.

In three years, we had three different principals. Each year, we
lost support personnel, such as curriculum specialists and counselors.
The teacher-turnover rate was incredibly high (in my third year, I was
considered a veteran).

However, the teachers who held high expectations for their students
and supported them in their learning saw gains with their students. My
2nd and 3rd graders loved learning and thrived in a demanding academic
environment.

There are so many factors contributing to the achievement gap, but
the bottom line is the importance of good teaching. Really good
teaching. Teachers whose drive and passion is teaching. How can we get
these teachers into the schools that need them the most?

Dorothy O'BrienLos Angeles, Calif.

To the Editor:

It's more than mere coincidence that the Educational Testing
Service's report about the persistent achievement gap between black and
Hispanic students on the one hand, and Asian and white students on the
other, comes on the heels of the publication of No Excuses: Closing
the Racial Gap in Learning by Abigail and Stephan Thernstrom.
("Book Cites Role of Culture
in Achievement Gap," Oct. 29, 2003.) The maddening racial disparity
in academic achievement has become arguably the hottest issue in
education today because of the demands made by the No Child Left Behind
Act for proficiency in reading and math for all students in public
schools by 2014.

The fundamental difference between the ETS report and the
Thernstroms' book has to do with the locus of responsibility for
remedying the matter. The Thernstroms attribute the gap primarily to
cultural factors that exist outside of school. Nevertheless, they want
schools to undertake two daunting tasks simultaneously: one cultural
and one academic. They will accept no excuses—so the title of
their book announces—as to why all schools cannot perform both
duties, when some schools have been able to do so. It matters not one
whit to them that the few schools that have been successful in both
areas have been composed of self-selected parents and students, with
highly trained and motivated teachers.

The ETS, with its long history of denial about the unfairness of its
standardized tests, ironically is fairer about the role of schools in
addressing the achievement gap. By admitting that factors exist beyond
the control of teachers that only the nation as a whole can address,
the ETS shows that it has a more realistic understanding of the basic
causes of this vexing problem.

Reasons are not the same as excuses. Unfortunately, that's a lesson
the Thernstroms have not learned.

Walt GardnerLos Angeles, Calif.

To the Editor:

The largest difficulty to overcome in my affluent district in
Fairfax County, Va., is the insistence among the privileged that their
edge continue. Parents believe that their children are entitled to the
spoils, since the parents have higher SAT scores and higher salaries
than other people. Hence, they get these things by self-described
"merit."

Doing something that might even the playing field by providing
others what they provide their children—for example, special
tutoring—is greeted with demands that the tutoring be provided to
all, and not just to those who are behind.

The privileged class has an advantage today, and they will not give
it up willingly. This is a real shame, because it can be a win-win
situation. Yet they treat it as win-lose: If your child catches up, he
will take my child's place in that selective college. And thus, they
steal the future that attending that college would provide. How do we
overcome that?

Dick ReedAlexandria, Va.

Teachers' Coursework: 'Cookie Cutter' Drivel?

To the Editor:

Linda Darling-Hammond criticizes David M. Steiner's research on
teacher-preparation coursework because he relies on course outlines
instead of actual course content for his conclusions ("Education School Courses
Faulted as Intellectually Thin," Nov. 12, 2003). I have an M.Ed.
degree and have attended three recognized schools of education, and it
is my experience that course outlines greatly inflate the intellectual
content of education school courses. The actual course content is well
below what is in the outline.

Course content is, more often than not, mere drivel. If Mr. Steiner
had used course content for his research, his conclusions would have
been even gloomier.

Ken KopickiChicago, Ill.

To the Editor:

As a former superintendent and assistant superintendent, who over 12
years interviewed hundreds of teacher applicants, I fully understand
David M. Steiner's observations regarding the repressive nature of
traditional knowledge imparted to students in a monolithic ideological
context. Many of the applicants for teaching positions that I met were
"cookie cutter" types with their rehearsed answers to interview
questions and their standard applicant portfolios in hand.

Refreshing indeed was the time spent with those candidates who had
ideas about teaching and educational practice that were not simply the
repackaged words of the theorists they became acquainted with over
their time in university classrooms. I was genuinely excited by the
time spent with applicants who could represent ideas about the most
important issues facing educators in a way that reflected an ability to
take theory to an application level and enthusiastically portray their
beliefs about teaching children in ways characteristic of our best
veteran teachers.

Now, afforded the opportunity of preparing graduate students in
educational leadership, I strive to have my students cultivate the
ability to explore and translate theory into practice and to make that
application a cornerstone of their professional pursuits.

I can understand how some may argue that course outlines are hardly
the sole source of data on the efficacy of teacher-preparation
practices. Regardless of whether one is predisposed to accept or reject
Mr. Steiner's research, any deliberation of current approaches in the
preparation of tomorrow's teachers should be greeted enthusiastically.
It should serve as encouragement to engage in one of the most important
professional practices, known as reflection.